Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor

Another turn of the polling screw against the Coalition, as formerly uncommitted respondents increasingly offer a negative view of the Prime Minister.

The fortnightly Essential poll — now appearing in Newspoll off weeks, praise be — follows Newspoll in recording Labor’s lead at 54-46, out from 53-47. Monthly personal ratings are better for Scott Morrison than Newspoll in that he remains in net positive territory, but the formerly undecided are breaking heavily against him, with his approval down two to 41% and disapproval up nine to 37%. Bill Shorten maintains his recent improving form, up five on approval to 38% and down one on disapproval to 44% – his second best result from the pollster in the past two years. However, the shift on preferred prime minister is relatively modest, with Morrison’s lead down from 42-27 to 41-29.

Other findings: 44% support Australia becoming a republic in principle, down four since May, with 32% opposed; 61% have a favourable view of Queen Elizabeth, 68% of Prince William, 70% of Prince Harry but only 33% of Prince Charles. The Guardian report is here; the full report from Essential Research, including primary votes, will be with us later today. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1028.

UPDATE: Full report from Essential Research here, and the primary vote shifts are on the high end from what you’d expect out of a one-point shift on two-party preferred: the Coalition is down two to 36%, and Labor up two to 39%, the Greens are steady on 10% and One Nation are down one to 6%.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,958 comments on “Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor”

  1. phoenixRED @ #1648 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 5:19 pm

    Bushfire Bill says: Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 5:14 pm

    Let us quit the moral indignation for 5 minutes. Groping, sexual assault, whatever you want to call it – aggravated, dtunken or otherwise – is not a capital offence.

    ********************************************************

    As approved by the most powerful man in the world/leader of the free world :

    “Grab them by the pussy” !!!!!

    ( VOMIT )

    the most powerful OLD WHITE man in the world/leader of the free world

  2. NSW Opposition Leader Luke Foley will resign as Labor leader after the ABC journalist at the centre of harassment allegations released an explosive statement detailing the incident.

    The Herald has confirmed Mr Foley will announce he is standing down as Labor leader when he holds a press conference at NSW Parliament House at 5.30pm on Thursday.

    https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/luke-foley-resigns-as-nsw-labor-leader-following-explosive-allegations-20181108-p50euz.html

  3. Frednk – I won’t be lowering myself to respond to your contemptible comment, except to say this: your post stands in condemnation of itself.

  4. Bushfire Bill says: Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 5:21 pm

    Phoenix, I was referring to speculation of Foley self-harming. Not excusing such behaviour.

    ******************************************************

    Totally agree Bushfire Bill – NO MAN or PERSON should think such !!! ……. totally sick of these rich pricks/positions of some authority subjecting ANY woman to such indignity to satisfy their sick fantasy !!!!

  5. Like Foley has no other option. I am quite relieved. My wife and I can now restore our intention to vote Labor in the coming State election. Had Foley stayed on, we would have voted “1 Green” and then not allocated preferences.

  6. A_E:

    Labor MPs are apparently talking up Michael Daley as replacement leader.

    This is a mistake. Daley is a log.

    Without making any comment on the various candidates, and knowing that my priorities here are not going to be the priorities of the NSW ALP in any way shape or form, I’d reiterate a point I have made before:

    A long term, strong Federal ALP government is the only game in town that counts, and one of the bigger threats to that would be a half-baked scandal-prone NSW ALP getting up in March.

    Now maybe today’s Foley scandal has sunk any chances of the NSW ALP getting up, but if they put in some cleanskin who presents well now, and given the rate at which the Berejiklian government is imploding, the NSW ALP still seem too dangerously close to maybe winning.

    Better, in my view (and yes, with my priorities that would clearly not be those of the NSW ALP) for a stable steady (non-)performer like Daley to take over, take the NSW ALP to a close defeat and then replace him after the election with a genuine future hope.

    But I guess that’s just me.

  7. frednk
    says:
    It’s a crime, I was wondering how much time you think he should get.
    ________________________________

    In essence, an assault becomes an indecent assault when it has a sexual connotation or overtone to it.
    It’s indecent because the act is not in line with the respectable community standards of the day, and has caused the other person to fear unlawful violence, either sexual violence or ordinary violence.
    For example, touching the private parts of a woman or man is an indecent assault.
    Indecent assault penalties
    There are a number of penalties you face if you are convicted of indecent assault, including:
    A fine.
    A good behaviour bond.
    A community service order.
    An intensive correction order.
    A suspended sentence.
    Prison – the maximum penalty for indecent assault is five years’ imprisonment. However, this is rarely invoked, as it is saved for the most serious of indecent assault offences.

    https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/a-guide-to-indecent-assault-penalties/

  8. I for one don’t disagree with you Jackol.

    If the transaction was that we had to suffer a NSW Lib government for another term or two in order to ensure an ALP Federal Government for 4 terms it’s a deal I’d take in a heartbeat. For all the NSW Government’s faults it is an improvement on Rees/Kenneally and looks like an exemplar of good government compared to the freakshow of fuckwits posing as government in Canberra.


  9. JimmyD says:
    Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 5:26 pm

    Frednk – I won’t be lowering myself to respond to your contemptible comment, except to say this: your post stands in condemnation of itself.

    I was not commenting, I was asking questions, your the one defining the crime. I want a clear understand of the crime and defense that is all.

    I am sorry to report I didn’t have the girl charged; clearly I lack moral fiber. In my world having her attempting to put her hands down my trousers was not a crime to ruin her life over.

  10. C@tmomma
    says:
    Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 5:32 pm
    Is there anyone on PB that nath hasn’t abused in the short time he’s been here?
    _____________________________________
    Quite a few. I have been abused by more I reckon. I take it on the chin. No problems.

  11. Ven
    says:
    Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 5:41 pm
    5:32pm@pm
    He has abused everybody
    ___________________
    I don’t believe that I have abused you Ven. Please apologise.

  12. Ms Raper said that she froze when Foley allegedly groped her.

    Won’t be long till PB experts start criticising her for freezing and failing to deal with it then and there.

    And why didn’t she go to police?

    And why has she done nothing for 2 years?

    And why is she acting on it now?

    Is she a liberal plant to weaken Labor’s election chances?

    Since she did nothing at the time or since till now, she must not have thought it important at the time. So now she’s exaggerating or lying.

    #mencanreadwomensminds

  13. C@tmomma says:
    Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 5:42 pm
    Diogenes @ #1660 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 5:39 pm

    Who else in the Labor Party knew about Foley’s indecent assault?

    Jumping the gun a bit there.

    That was my first reaction C@t. If the question had to be asked it should have been who else knew about the allegation. Foley has denied it.

  14. At the end of the day, Foley trying to cover up the incident and lying publicly is what will do him in (and deservedly so).

    The only real value in politicians is their judgement.

    If Foley didn’t realise that this story would eventually leak in all it’s inglory, then Labor and the body politic are well rid of him.

    If he’d fessed up early, done some penance and shown genuine contrition then perhaps he could have saved his career. But he didn’t and must face the consequences.

    Sad for him and his family. But, he did it all to himself.

  15. Jackol- with the NSW election and federal election being likely held effectively back to back, a win by NSW Labor at a state level won’t lead to any backlash against Labor federally because there simply won’t be any time for the incoming NSW Government to do anything unpopular. In fact anything it will do in those few weeks between the two elections will likley be perceived to be a positive: i.e. announcing an end to any outstanding privatisation projects; cancelling the partial demolition and rebuild of the Olympic Stadium etc.

    If anything, federal Labor could benefit from the honeymoon period of the incoming state government: particularly if – as seems likley – NSW and Federal Labor coordinate their election pledges on infrastructure, health and education spending.

    Anyway Foley has now resigned (claiming innocence – messy) and I’m really hoping that either Jodi or Ryan succeeds him.

  16. ABC saying he has resigned and started defamation proceedings.

    What gives?

    Luke Foley resigns as NSW Labor Leader following ABC journalist’s statement

    Luke Foley has resigned as NSW Labor leader.

    Mr Foley said he had retained solicitors to commence defamation proceedings after an ABC journalist released a statement detailing how he put his hand down her dress at a Christmas party in 2016.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-08/nsw-labor-leader-luke-foley-to-resign/10477996

  17. The open question seems to be whether political leaders should be held to a higher standard in relation to sexual harrassment, abuse and assault than the common person.

  18. ‘Diogenes says:
    Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 5:47 pm

    So is Foley denying he did it, denying he rang her to apologise and deny he then rang her to say he’d been advised not to resign?’

    You did say of the Rush matter, ‘It is a mess.’
    This looks to be even worse.

  19. Zoomster, Confessions, puffytmd and other female PB bloggers

    I do not care what BB posts. He is still living in past.
    When we were ready to bury Joyce for his alleged sexual assault on WA woman, we should do the same to Foley
    You all know how I feel about Joyce. I am his harshest critic regarding personal behaviour and political life.

    We all know that public has a short fuse for Labor politicians misbehaviour.

  20. steve
    “Foley innocent until proven guilty?”
    Good question
    Weinstein innocent until proven guilty?
    Rush innocent until proven guilty?
    Barnyard innocent until proven guilty?
    Kavanaugh innocent until proven guilty?

  21. Anyway Foley’s gone. Is there anyone in the NSW Labor caucus who can make a decent fist of taking the fight up to the ramshackle Liberal government?

  22. Will Foley follow through with defamation? Doesn’t it sometimes happen that people start defamation proceedings, only to let them lapse once the media has moved on?

  23. News saying he is suing the ABC.
    “In a brief statement to media, Mr Foley insisted the allegations were “false” and he intended to begin defamation proceedings against the ABC”
    I would have thought that the ABC’s lawyers would have been all over this with a fine toothed comb.

  24. A_E – it’s not this Federal election I’m worried about – Shorten should have it in the bag barring acts of god – it’s winning the next Federal election with a quite possibly unpopular State ALP government in NSW weighing them down. One term is not enough to fix what needs to be fixed and keep things in place long enough to ward off the next LNP vandals when they get back into power.

    If the NSW ALP leader and team had shown any competence, vision, integrity etc this would be less of an issue for me. But all they have been doing is looking like falling over the line as the Berejiklian government comes a cropper, taking a few cheap shots lining up on the side of the gambling industry along the way. That doesn’t lend itself to being hopeful they would suddenly get their act together in government.

  25. Ven
    says:
    Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 5:41 pm
    5:32pm@pm
    He has abused everybody
    _________________
    Ven when have I ever abused you? please apologise

  26. nath
    So it’s 5 years.
    The question is; was attempting ( I ware a tight belt not a low cut dress) to slip her hand down my trousers assault. Was the attempt sexual? She could have been trying to warm her hand and I completely miss interpreted what was happening and I should not have taken off like a bondi tram.

    Or is the bumb squeeze the assault?

  27. C@tmomma @ #1660 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 5:39 pm

    Luke Foley has denied the allegations by Ashleigh Raper and has commenced Defamation proceedings against her.

    This is no doubt intended to derail any press reporting until the election … at which point the lawsuit will be quietly dropped.

    This is a disgraceful way to treat Ashleigh Raper. I hope she counter-sues him for everything he has.

  28. Boerwar @ #1626 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 4:54 pm

    Darc
    Oh. Thanks.
    It has been suggested in Bludger that Norvill has no motivation to lie.
    Would the judge take into account possible motivations on the part of the witnesses off his own bat, or would argument as to possible motivation have to be raised by one or other side for the judge to take motivation into consideration?

    B,

    The problem in answering this is that given my lack of familiarity with the course of evidence and what in fact are the defamatory imputations being dealt with by the Court, any answer will be almost meaningless.

    I reckon I can probably safely say this:

    A lie is an intentional false statement. To prove or establish a lie, it is not necessary to prove any motivation on the part of witness, although a judge would be entitled to take motivation (or lack thereof) into account in deciding whether a person told a lie.

    Be that as it may, often (indeed, most) cases are determined without any need of finding that a witness lied. The court does not have to be satisfied that a witness lied to reject her or his evidence, notwithstanding that it was suggested to the witness that she or he did tell a lie. People can mistakenly recall or remember events, honestly believing them to have occurred. That is not a lie. Their evidence can be rejected by the Court without the need to find they have intentionally made a false statement.

    The critical thing the Court will focus on is whether, upon considering all the evidence, a matter or fact has been proved by the party who bears the onus of proving that matter or fact. It’s a civil standard of proof informed by the rule in the Briginshaw case.

    By way of example, in determining whether the defence of truth to the defamatory imputation of sexual pervert or predator was made out, given the seriousness of the matters to be established, the Court may find that it is not reasonably satisfied the evidence supports such a finding given, by way of hypothetical example, Mr Rush and his 3 witnesses were not seriously moved in their recollections of events and there is nothing otherwise to suggest that their evidence should not be accepted, the lack of any immediate complaint at the time by Ms Norvill or the other witness who said he saw something, any inconsistencies between or among Ms Norvill and the other witness as to their version of events, the demeanour of witnesses in court, the lack of evidence of any other incidents that may involve that kind of behaviour etc. etc. The court may also go so far as to find, in light of some or all of these matters, that it prefers the evidence of events given by Mr Rush and his witnesses to those of Mr Norvill and the other witness. None of these findings require a finding of lying by one witness or another. The issue remains whether a matter or fact has been established to the reasonable satisfaction of the Court in the circumstances.

    In my experience, most judges are reticent about finding whether anyone ‘lied’ if they have no need to make that finding in order to dispose of a case.

    That’s my thinking at least.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *